get_notification_count

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It only states the action without mentioning that it's a read-only operation, whether it affects read/unread state, or what scope the count applies to (e.g., current user). This is insufficient for a complete behavioral disclosure.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, direct sentence with no extraneous words. It is appropriately sized for such a simple operation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description gives the basic purpose but lacks detail about the return format or scope. Given there is no output schema, the agent is left guessing whether the result is a plain integer or a structured object. For such a simple tool, it is marginally complete, but it could specify the scope (e.g., for the authenticated user) to be fully clear.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema already confirms this (coverage 100%). The description adds nothing about parameters, but none are needed. The baseline of 4 is appropriate for a parameterless tool.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get unread notification count' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tool list_notifications, which would return notification items rather than a count. This is precise and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of list_notifications or any scenario where fetching the count is preferable to listing notifications. The agent receives no usage context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.